Big Pharma abuse...

Trump says it wasn’t ‘appropriate’ for him to keep owning stocks


President-elect Donald Trump on Wednesday cast his decision to sell off his stock portfolio in June as a major move to minimize his vast conflicts of interest and claimed it was widely known, despite the fact that it was just revealed on Tuesday.

“I don’t think it’s appropriate for me to be owning stocks when I’m making deals for this country that maybe will affect one company positively and one company negatively. So, I just felt it was a conflict,” Trump said in an interview with Matt Lauer on “Today” as he promoted being named as Time’s Person of the Year.


https://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/trump-response-selling-stock-232302
So instead he golfed 3 days a week at his courses, and funneled millions of dollars from the taxpayer into his coffers.

Trump’s insistence on playing at his own properties ― rather than courses on military bases close to the White House, as former President Barack Obama mainly did — has made his outings enormously expensive for American taxpayers. Each trip to Mar-a-Lago costs $3.4 million flying Trump, his staff and the vehicles needed for his motorcade on Air Force One and a number of cargo planes, as well as the expenses incurred by the Coast Guard to patrol both the Intracoastal Waterway and the Atlantic Ocean adjacent to his for-profit resort.

Trump has also made 23 trips to his course in Bedminster, New Jersey, at a cost of $1.1 million each as well as trips to his courses in Palos Verdes, California; Doral, Florida; Turnberry, Scotland; and Doonbeg, Ireland



The SS moved out of trump tower in NYC and into campers because he was raping the govt. for rent.

The Secret Service has moved out of Trump Tower in New York City to a street-level trailer in a dispute with the Trump Organization over a lease.


The federal agency which protects US presidents has been renting office space in the Midtown Manhattan skyscraper since 2015.


But its representatives are baulking at the cost and other unspecified rental terms, reports the Washington Post.

 
So again, i ask what that means for the working poor and below who have no savings?

How do they get "routine medical care", or "anything else", which i assume means all other health care that is not routine?

Most working poor are so because they cannot do more due to lack of intellect, education, motivation, or something else. That's not my problem and I see no particular reason why I should be paying for their shortcomings.

w0wos.jpg
 
Most working poor are so because they cannot do more due to lack of intellect, education, motivation, or something else. That's not my problem and I see no particular reason why I should be paying for their shortcomings.
...

Ok.

So we got to hear your hate for the working poor and you got to expose what a reprehensible human being you are. Glad you got to get that out.

Now why is it you object to the working poor being able to access Insurance for their healthcare then?

is your goal to deny them the ability to take on Insurance to punish them for being poor?
 
Last edited:
Most working poor are so because they cannot do more due to lack of intellect, education, motivation, or something else. That's not my problem and I see no particular reason why I should be paying for their shortcomings.

w0wos.jpg

Terry can you explain why you think it is wrong for the working poor to have an access to insurance?

Terry can you understand if you deny them access to Insurance and then they have an illness they cannot afford to treat they are more likely to end up on welfare and using State aid, and thus you do pay for their care thru your taxes.

Why do you think your hate of the working poor blinds you so much?
 
Terry can you explain why you think it is wrong for the working poor to have an access to insurance?

They have access, they just generally can't afford it. The problem is the system is based on using insurance to pay for what you, yourself should be paying for. Routine care and such should not require use of insurance.

Terry can you understand if you deny them access to Insurance and then they have an illness they cannot afford to treat they are more likely to end up on welfare and using State aid, and thus you do pay for their care thru your taxes.

Can you grasp they aren't being denied insurance. They often don't have it because they can't afford it. What YOU want is for other people to pay for their insurance. Then you try to make the argument that amounts to Well, there are other forms of welfare, so why not one more? Why massive use of welfare at all? Most poor people are capable of working, but many choose to be underemployed or with extant welfare programs choose to remain poor rather than better themselves because of all the handouts they get.

Why do you think your hate of the working poor blinds you so much?

Complex question fallacy. Why do you still beat your kids?
 
They have access, they just generally can't afford it. The problem is the system is based on using insurance to pay for what you, yourself should be paying for. Routine care and such should not require use of insurance.



Can you grasp they aren't being denied insurance. They often don't have it because they can't afford it. What YOU want is for other people to pay for their insurance. Then you try to make the argument that amounts to Well, there are other forms of welfare, so why not one more? Why massive use of welfare at all? Most poor people are capable of working, but many choose to be underemployed or with extant welfare programs choose to remain poor rather than better themselves because of all the handouts they get.



Complex question fallacy. Why do you still beat your kids?

You are still not answering why you would want to 'get rid of most insurance' those in the working poor do rely on, and saying many cannot afford is not a reason to get rid it for those who do budget and afford it.

you do realize those who cannot afford are not getting it right? SO when you say 'get rid of it', that is only for those who are paying and using it.

Why do you hate the working poor so much you would take that from them?
 
You are still not answering why you would want to 'get rid of most insurance' those in the working poor do rely on, and saying many cannot afford is not a reason to get rid it for those who do budget and afford it.

you do realize those who cannot afford are not getting it right? SO when you say 'get rid of it', that is only for those who are paying and using it.

Why do you hate the working poor so much you would take that from them?

I would get rid of most insurance because using insurance for routine healthcare, or for that matter virtually anything else, is costly and inefficient. If people paid as they went on healthcare--for routine care-- it would be cost effective and the poor could generally afford some level of care, probably better care than they get with insurance.

As for your last sentence, why do you keep bringing up a complex question fallacy about why you still beat your wife?
 
I would get rid of most insurance because using insurance for routine healthcare, or for that matter virtually anything else, is costly and inefficient. If people paid as they went on healthcare--for routine care-- it would be cost effective and the poor could generally afford some level of care, probably better care than they get with insurance.

As for your last sentence, why do you keep bringing up a complex question fallacy about why you still beat your wife?

Terry, the vast majority of working poor, and much of the middle class, live pay check to pay check.

You are speaking on a topic that you obviously have no clue about as almost everything outside "routine healthcare" is very expensive, so while they might be able to pay for "routine healthcare", what about care for everything but that, if society was to implement your desire of getting rid of all healthcare insurance?

Have you ever thought to glimpse on the data about medical bill bankruptcy in the US Terry? Something that would skyrocket even more if you took away all insurance from everyone and made them rely on savings or go bankrupt to get care.

Or do you just feel ok opining in complete ignorance on this topic as well?

The reason i ask you why you hate the working poor, and actually most of the middle class is because you would devastate them financially, with any family complex family illness.
 
Why do Republi'cans' fight to preserve this big Pharma Oligopoly and Corporatocracy abuse, ...

Pharma needs to be nationalized, end of story.

The private sector is for clothes, cars, and restaurants, not critical medications.
 
Pharma needs to be nationalized, end of story.

The private sector is for clothes, cars, and restaurants, not critical medications.

I actually would not share that position, but there is no reason to not have one National Drug buying group, made up of representatives nominated by each State, that negotiated bulk pricing that was then broken up back to the States. That way tiny Red States would get the benefit of the buying power of Cali and NYS.

I have lots of family in Canada and can tell you that type of buying power matters a lot in bringing down prices and say what any one wants about Canadian Healthcare, it is pharma prices or access that causes any of the issues in that system. I am not one to say the Canadian system is perfect, as it is not. BUt overall for average citizens and the working poor it is way better than our system here and for rich Canadians they have access to the US or other system, if they feel they need it.

But Pharma costs are something Canada has got 100% correct.
 
Understandable.
You're a modern progressive.
I'm a democratic socialist.

I'm actually right of Progressives but left of Corporate Democrats. My views best align with Canadian Conservative party which is just right of the Canadian Liberal party.

This is the left right spectrum of major parties across both Countries.


NDP/(US Progressives) ........ Liberal Party(CDN) ./. Conservative party (CDN) ....... Democrat Party ...................................GOP

The space of gaps is intentional to demonstrate how close each party is to the others platforms.

The hash represents the Center and you can see both major Cdn parties are centrist with only a slight difference. The US has no center party currently by any world definition. It is right and extreme right choice with progressives making noise but not YET flexing much power.
 
Last edited:
Terry, the vast majority of working poor, and much of the middle class, live pay check to pay check.

You are speaking on a topic that you obviously have no clue about as almost everything outside "routine healthcare" is very expensive, so while they might be able to pay for "routine healthcare", what about care for everything but that, if society was to implement your desire of getting rid of all healthcare insurance?

Have you ever thought to glimpse on the data about medical bill bankruptcy in the US Terry? Something that would skyrocket even more if you took away all insurance from everyone and made them rely on savings or go bankrupt to get care.

Or do you just feel ok opining in complete ignorance on this topic as well?

The reason i ask you why you hate the working poor, and actually most of the middle class is because you would devastate them financially, with any family complex family illness.

You assume that the ONLY solution to healthcare is through socialization and use of government. I assume that the solution is returning to an open and free market where insurance is not the rule but rather the exception to healthcare payment.

Interestingly, it was government that gave us the fucked up payment system using insurance with regards to healthcare to begin with. You naïvely assume that more government is the solution to a problem the government created. It isn't.

If we stopped using insurance to pay for every doctor visit, every prescription filled, prices would FALL dramatically, not rise. More use of insurance and more government ensures that both will rise not fall, or the alternative government always turns to for cost control, rationing begins to happen. Your solution IS the problem, not the answer.
 
Why do Republi'cans' fight to preserve this big Pharma Oligopoly and Corporatocracy abuse, ...


Cliffs :

- video explains how pharmacist can sell certain medications to person at $X price but how, as soon as they mention they have Insurance, he is required to both swipe the card, and NOT tell the person they would actually pay less out of pocket, if they did not use their Insurance.

- His Cost : $2
- He would sell for $4
- she says she has Insurance. His gag clause kicks in.
- Swipes card and Insurance 'co pay' says the price is $10
- she now pays $10
- $7 goes to Big Pharma
- he makes $3

He could lose his pharma license if he told her his cash pay price which would save her money.

Any reform of this system is instantly blocked by Republi'cans'.


Pfizer, Moderna, the democrat party - Siamese triplets...

This is just you fascists trying to blame your victims for your sins, yet again.
 
You assume that the ONLY solution to healthcare is through socialization and use of government. ....

I am going to shut down your lie right there and not allow you to try and change the topic as that is not what i said nor what we were discussing.

We were discussing you wanting to shut down ALL FORMS of health insurance in America. Full stop. Period.

To which i claimed it that would drastically harm the working poor and those below that. And your reply to that was basically they are 'unmotivated and lazy and not disciplined anyway'. Oh and that they need to be able to pay out of pocket, find a way to save up, or do without any care that is not basic care.

You then seem to take issue with me pointing out your hate of the working poor and below, and quite frankly much of the middle class who live pay check to pay check who would all face bankruptcy with any serious health issues.
 
Back
Top